Re: [secdir] [Cfrg] ISE seeks help with some crypto drafts

[Aaron Zauner <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

I see some really misinformed comments in this thread.

There’s a general IPR exemption for OCB(3) for IETF by Rogaway and the IBM Corporation (Jutla), which is everything that’s necessary to go ahead and stanardize and use that mode. I’ve previously spent quite some time cultivating a AES-OCB ciphersuite draft* for TLS 1.2 (not necessary for 1.3 IMO) as an alternative to GCM. Unfortunately back very few people really seemed to understand why I’m working on this and only a handful were really interested with the whole standardidzation of TLS 1.3 going on and lots of custom $vendor extensions being discussed. I was thinking to pick this up again as it’d make sense  for TLS 1.2 still and as OCB3 is a CEASAR finalist there’s something new to add to the paper (and the security section w.r.t. OCB2 attacks - where I agree with Tony - have nothing to do with OCB3 from what I could tell reading them), anyway. The IPR exemptions are over here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?id=draft-zauner-tls-aes-ocb&submit=draft

It took IBM lawyers quite a while working this out but after I contacted Rogaway he was very forthcoming and came up with that exemption within a few weeks of initially talking to him about the topic in general, as was Jutla once contacted by Rogaway (working at IBM, he had to contact legal and go through all kinds of bureaucracy from what I understood).

Hope that helps to clear things up a bit.

Greetings,
Aaron 

* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-zauner-tls-aes-ocb/